|
Go for the cheapest reasonable car option and stick all your money into your house fund. In the long run it will be the best investment you can ever make. Getting a house now will set you up for the rest of your life. Once you are in your own house the financial benefits will enable you to have nice cars later on in life.
|
Go for the cheapest reasonable car option and stick all your money into your house fund. In the long run it will be the best investment you can ever make. Getting a house now will set you up for the rest of your life. Once you are in your own house the financial benefits will enable you to have nice cars later on in life.
Just joining in late on this thread, I'd agree with expat: putting the money towards a home will not only be a good investment (whereas a car is just an expense), it will give you much more pleasure in the long run.
I'd also agree with mapmaker that the company car is unlikely to provide as good a financial deal for you as you'd get from owning your own car.
In the meantime, the cars you are looking at all seem to be those with sticker prices upwards of £12,000. One way or another, the lease payments will have to cover them losing about £8,000 over the next four years (OK, the lease companies may buy them a bit cheaper, so maybe it's a £6,000 loss, but that's still a lot of money). Plus you have the BiK tax etc.
So, instead of handing that much money to the motor trade by taking the company car, why not take the cash alternative and get something nearly as good and save lottsa money?
According to Parkers, a two-year-old Skoda Fabia 1.9Tdi Comfort could be yours from a franchised dealer for less than £8,000. Lowish mileage, still within waranty, and worth not much less in four years time if you keep it that long; plus, if you decide to sell it in the meantime, you'll recoup much more of your money.
The 1.9TDi/100 isn't as fast as the 130 in the vRS, but it'll still be no slouch and have lots more voomf than Polo. It's insurance group 5 (instead of group 10 for the vRS), and since it looks less bling, it'll be less likely to be stolen. Apart from a smoother ride, it also has a smoother power delivery than the VRS, both of which are likely to make it easier to live with on a day-to-day basis.
It'll probably also be better for your image and your chances of further promption. The VRS or the Audi will mark you out as a brash young thing burning her money on a toy, which is unlikely to impress either your bosses or your clients. (If you think that the Fabia is a bit too dowdy, similar money would get you a SEAT Ibiza 1.9TDi SE 5d).
Anyway, I know that's not answering the question you asked. But my honest answer to the question you posed is "none of the above". Good luck with whatever choice you make!
|
I think that Expat was just suggesting going for the cheaper lease option so as to save more for eventual house purchase - sensible without taking the fun out of it. There isn't a cash alternative, as PG said above.
Whenever someone comes on here asking about what sort of new car to get, don't you find there's always a 'voice of prudence' saying "Don't do it". I think that's rather a shame: new cars are one of the fun things in life, even if they don't always make the best financial sense.
I *like* new cars, so a taxidermist's curse on the prophets of doom....
Although I'm a chartered accountant and shouldn't say it, I will anyway - enjoy your new car, PG, and have what you want. This seems to be your best chance to have a new car AND save for the house.
|
>>'voice of prudence' saying "Don't do it"
Voices of wisdom more like.
A car is essentially just a lump of steel and plastic. As long as it fulfils its basic A - B requirement, any extra you pay isn't really value for money.
I think that owning a nice car won't magically make a miserable person happy, just as owning an older, or cheaper car won't make a happy person sad. Thankfully, there's much more to life!
Portraying cars as a fun thing, a lifestyle choice, an indicator of personality, etc., etc., is just another way that those clever marketing people have warped our brains, such that weak minded expensive automotive folly is now seen as the norm. A curse on all the sharp suited brain washers, advertisers, and spin doctors!
Number_Cruncher
|
|
|
I think that Expat was just suggesting going for the cheaper lease option so as to save more for eventual house purchase - sensible without taking the fun out of it. There isn't a cash alternative, as PG said above.
Sorry PG, I had missed the bit about there not being a cash alternative.
But I'd still suggest that it'd be best to go for something cheaper than what's on the list at the start of this thread.
Even the cheapest option, at £110 a month, adds up to more than £5,000 over the four years. That money in cash could open a lot more options when buying a house, such as having the cash to redo the kitchen -- or even to buy some furniture without having to go into debt. You'd be amazed how much diference a bit of cash in the pocket makes at that point. (Alternatively, you could escape from the daily grind with some very fun holidays).
The cheapest option on the list, the Jazz Sport, is £11,700 RRP. I'd suggest looking instead at something with an RRP under £10,000. The C4 sounds like a good idea; another possibility would be the Fiesta with the same engine (higher RRP, but should be good deals available)
It'll still be a new car, with car new-smell, muchly better performance and handling than Polo, and much more safe and comfortable.
|
Something you may like to think about if you have any No claims Bonus left, ( I cannot remember if all your misfortunes were self inflicted). If you go the company car route you will loose any hard earned bonus after 2 years of no policy .
If you move jobs and then need to provide your own car (something more than Group 4 say), loss of bonus will come as very expensive.
Look at taking over one of the short term leases (even if a little expensive at first), with a view to buying it and running it privately at the end of the lease, if it has proved reliable and with a reasonable history. Over 4 years it will probably be very cost effective for you.
--
pmh (was peter)
|
NowWheels wrote>> The 1.9TDi/100 isn't as fast as the 130 in the vRS, but it'll still be no slouch and have lots more voomf than Polo. It's insurance group 5 (instead of group 10 for the vRS), and since it looks less bling, it'll be less likely to be stolen.
She picks up on the main reason TO have a company car. To have somebody else pay the ridiculous insurance of a high insurance group car. Although...
... as the car is leased, does that make any difference? With a car OWNED by a company, iirc you usually are given £12,000 (say) to spend, and they then pick up the extras. Does the leasing company provide the insurance?
Who cares if a company car is stolen? Means you get a new one. Get the car written off every two years and you ALWAYS have a new car.
Finally, pmh, I thought you could usually carry ncb over from a company car to your own car?
|
MM
Whilst things may have changed now, at one time the best you could get was an 'introductory discount' based on your company car history of (no) claims. Not always onward transferable as a NCB.
--
pmh (was peter)
|
I quite like hearing everyones' differing opinions, and have been around here long enough to know that if you say "Shall I do A or B" most people will come along and suggest "C" or "a mondeo tdci".
I totalled up my log book records for the last financial year, and I'm covering between 25-30k miles a year - I just think I would get ever so tired of being in a Jazz sized car for all those miles, which are about a 60/40 split of motorway and non-motorway.
I went to the VW place in Digbeth at the weekend (the Wolverhampton salesman couldn't be bothered to speak to me once he found out it was a lease car) and was disappointed! The Golf tdi SE is ever so basic inside - still on dials for things like the aircon rather than digital buttons and display. The GT Tdi has a mildly more attractive interior but from the outside doesn't look like the special car you'd expect to be paying that extra for - I expected more GTi touches I suppose and there are none. And then I saw the preview photos of the new 2008 Golf and realised I would be envious for the last two years of the lease!
Which brings me back to Honda and the new civic. It's hardly going to look out of date in two years, and the 2.2 i-cdi sport engine is the same as my other half's new Accord, which I adore driving - it's so easy. It has more on it than the Golf and is the same monthly contribution. But I've read some not so favourable things about it's visibility, and after driving a Beetle for the day and nearly going mad at it's blind spots, I'm not sure. I'll definitely test drive it.
To answer a query that has come up a few times, the monthly fee I pay includes the car, maintenance, insurance, tax and income tax, and I can claim a small amount on top of that for any business miles I do. I have three years no claims at the moment, but it's pretty standard practice these days to be able to get a letter from your employer and be credited no claims for a certain number of years with no claims made on the company insurance, so that's not a great worry to me.
I've done some rough calculations and in the last year, servicing, maintenance, tyres, insurance and tax for Polo has cost around £1700 (just had yet another set of damn front wishbones!). For just £700 more than that per year I can have trouble free, stress free motoring, in a car I couldn't hope to insure myself without astronomical cost, and I've just had a payrise so it's money I wont even notice has gone because there will still be more money on my payslip than before. Polo isn't going to last forever, and I need a car for work, so I don't want to be in a situation where I find I suddenly need to spend a lot of money either to fix him or buy a car to get me out of a jam, that I haven't budgeted for. Also it's not the risk that a loan or finance would be. I don't know why I feel the need to justify it but it would seem to make sense to me.
Would be interested to hear anyone elses' opinon on the diesel civics, particularly about the visibility and whether I should lower my sights to the 1.7 diesel or if the 2.2 really is the one to have.
I promise I will make a decision soon!
|
From what i remember the 1.7 is related to the old isuzu engine as used in vauxhalls for many years so it's probably fairly robust but not exactly a dynamic design.
I would still be leaning towards the fabia though - you've admitted you like them and it'll do fine on the motorway so go for that and save the extra few quid a month (it'll cheer NowWheels no end!).
|
PG: if you like style and don't like the Megane, I wd have thought the new Civic might be just the ticket. Dramatic looking little device.
Only a stark roadster gives proper all-round visibility.
|
|
|
|
